"Natural
Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
"Natural
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage
bill"
16.10 Maximum Contact & Friendly Parent Rule
has to go to conform to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be
held in criminal BREACH OF TRUST"
FYI,
the ideas that the State grants
Rights
Responsibilities Citizen is straight from pre-war Nazi
Germany. Under the British system rights are not
State-given, but God Given.
Buying into the Court's position that what
rights remain are Children's Rights, is buying into the same
position that "<Natural> Parents have no rights", and
Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.
In
"Women and the Process of Constitutional Reform"
McLellan warns that <Horrors!>
"Provincial
Legislatures may impose a presumption of Joint Custody...
and perpetuate the domination of men over women"
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and
they will likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these
days".
This is completely FALSE. The Judges
are Agents of the Crown and they BY DEFINITION Judges are WITHOUT
CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever. Since
1649, only
PARLIAMENT has the Capacity to make Law.
British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was
only observed and documented by individuals sent out by the
newly Norman Crown after the
Norman Conquest of 1066 to observe and codify the
laws and customs of the various peoples of Britain..
This was done with a view to aggregate existing customs
which may vary across the land, into a unified body of
Laws. The Authority quoted by the Commoners in their
administration of
Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and
principles of
Danelaw
The process of documentation took only a
couple of hundred years, and the product was a STATIC body
of Law which was historical, popular, and has served in the
intervening centuries as a Benchmark against which
Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".
It does NOT change.
Instead their position to promote the
"rights" of a "Parent" in the widest sense of the
word, making NO distinction between
NATURAL PARENTS and
wannaabe
Legal Parents. They have bowed to
University of
Victoria's assertion that the SCC's
Trociuk
Decision
"endorses a Heterosexual View of the Family and must be
ignored", legitimizing the ongoing
Child
Trafficking by the State which views
Canadian
children as State Property and merchandise for sale in
the lucrative Child
Adoption Market They refuse to be hampered by prior
obligations to that pesky Natural Parent who thinks they can
Veto an Adoption.
It appears that many
"Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United
Nations and Liberal
Irwin Cotler's assertion that the
Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent
has "NO RIGHTS",
making the State, not the Natural
Parents the Protector of the Child..
Without Cause or
Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!
"In spite of credible revelations
dating back to April 2002 about Bill Graham, a sex addicted
bi-sexual sodomizing a 15 year old male prostitute named
Lawrence Metherel,
Paul Martin allowed Graham to remain
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named
him to the portfolio of Minister of Defense.
"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the
age of consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in
the world) to 16 (an age which many still consider too low).
"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne
McLellan, on Sept. 28th, voted against raising the age of
consent to 16
We apologize that the
following figures have not been developed for the Province of BC
specifically. We hope to do this over time. We do know,
however that women often move to BC from Alberta and the rest of Canada
to have their divorces done here in BC where the
misandry of the Family Courts will
maximize their powers to destroy their husbands.
Children from fatherless homes account
for:
63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept.
of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US
Dept. of Health & Human Services)
90% of all homeless and runaway
children.
70% of juveniles in state-operated
institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all children that exhibit
behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
80% of rapists motivated with displaced
anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26,
1978).
71% of all high school dropouts.
(Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High
Schools).
75% of all adolescent patients in
chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children).
85% of all youths sitting in prisons.
(Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of
Corrections 1992).
Children from fatherless
homes are:
11 times more likely to exhibit violent
behavior than children from intact "married" homes.
5 times more likely to commit suicide.
32 times more likely to runaway.
20 times more likely to have behavioral
disorders.
14 times more likely to commit rape.
9 times more likely to drop out of high
school.
10 times more likely to abuse chemical
substances.
9 times more likely to end up in
state-operated institutions.
20 times more likely to end up in
prison.
"37.9% of
fathers have no access/visitation rights."
(Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau
P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)
"40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the
non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish
the ex-spouse." (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing
Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in
Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of
Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)
"Overall,
approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father's continued
contact with his children...."
(Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith
Wallerstein, p. 125) Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input
when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors
rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated %16.(Source: EDK
Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November
1994, p. 36)
"The former
spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent
contact with the children." (Source:
Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with
their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July
1991.)
"A clear
majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their
children." (Source: Visitation and the
Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce,
Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)
"Very few of
the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their
fathers, after divorce." (Source:
Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of
Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)
"Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective
involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes
sabotage father's efforts to visit their children." (Source:
Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July
1993.)
"Mothers may
prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their
marital or post-marital relationship."
(Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family,
Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
In a study: "Visitational
Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and
Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers
are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a
result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent.
In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three
times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and
impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept.
1992
Child Support
Information from multiple
sources show that only 10% of all non-custodial fathers fit the
"deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the
support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of
those with NO visitation rights still financially support their
children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because
they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report:
GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security
Policy, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
Custodial mothers who receive a support
award: 79.6%
Custodial fathers who receive a support
award: 29.9%
Non-custodial mothers who totally
default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally
default on support: 26.9%
Judges and their elite
Star
Chamber entrench their power and status to rule over Canadians with
impunity and unbridled
narcissism.
Feminist and Homosexual Activists as Judges effect
their political agenda without the consent of the Canadian demographic.
They with full knowledge and intent (scripted in the sixties & seventies
by their Activist writers) circumvent due democratic process and
knowingly contravene the founding legal constructs of Canada in the BNA
& in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Activist Judges happily
and routinely breach the Trust placed in them by their employer, the
Canadian Taxpayer.
Lawyers routinely Entice into self-destruction and
financial rape vast numbers of families entering their doors.
Because of the Statutory self-regulation of the BC Law Society, we know
of no limiting factor to cap the Activism of the Judiciary other than
prosecuting Judges and Lawyers who exceed the powers granted them by
Statute.
The BC Law Society pimps BC women, and use them as
their hookers. With others (also conspicuously funded by the
Taxpayer), Law Society members instruct women to hook fathers and
families into the Courts and the financial ruin a "Legal Marriage"
entails. Children NEED this threat to their security to be
EXTERMINATED.
Faced with the entrenched Father Hatred and
Affirmative Action of the burgeoning civil service, boys and young men
despair. Having no vision for a Future or a university education,
they become prone to fulfill the Father Hatred prophecies of BC
university's Women's Studies faculties and Feminist Activists.
"Children of single parents were at
higher risk of physical abuse and of all types of neglect and were
overrepresented among seriously injured, moderately injured, and
endangered children. Compared with their counterparts living with both
parents, children in single parent families had:
a 77% greater risk of being
harmed by physical abuse (using the stringent Harm Standard) and a
63% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical abuse (using
the Endangerment Standard);
an 87% greater risk of being
harmed by physical neglect and a 165% greater risk of experiencing
any countable physical neglect;
a 74% greater risk of being
harmed by emotional neglect and a 64% greater risk of experiencing
any countable emotional neglect;
a 220% (or more than three
times) greater risk of being educationally neglected;
an approximately 80% greater
risk of suffering serious injury or harm from abuse or neglect;
an approximately 90% greater
risk of receiving moderate injury or harm as a result of child
maltreatment; and
a 120% (or more than two times)
greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse or
neglect."
2006-11-10
Top judges rebuke Tories Federal plan would allow police to help
appoint judiciary - workopolis.com; "Beverley
McLachlin, Canada's Chief Justice, along with a powerful council of
the country's top judges issued an unprecedented rebuke yesterday to
Justice Minister Vic Toews for hatching a plan to arbitrarily change
the way judges are chosen. The Canadian Judicial Council
expressed dismay that Mr. Toews is planning to introduce "significant
changes to the composition and functioning of the Judicial Advisory
Committees," secret groups which are set up in each region to vet
candidates for the 1,100 federal judgeships across the country.
Chief Justice McLachlin, who chairs the council, urged Mr. Toews to
include the judiciary and key legal bodies in any discussion of
changes to the committee vetting process."
We
need in the very least some kind of JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
which will look something like::
Divide the Law Society into two groups of
Judges and Practicing Lawyers to protect the Lawyers who would
make Cases against Judges. There would be some Law Society
Members who may practice as Barristers, and some as Solicitors,
but a Judge must RETIRE from the Practice of Law and
become unable to affect the Law Society while they act as a
Judge. On removal of a Judge for
Judicial Activism,
the Law Society may deny their return to Practice from
Retirement for specified cause, such as the case made during
an unsuccessful Criminal Charge of
Breach of Trust or Treason.
The Judges naturally divide into two bodies,
the Provincial and Federal Judicial Societies to parallel the
Provincial and Federal Courts. Membership in both Judicial
Societies must be precluded. Federal Judges would be tried
by Provincial Judges according to the
JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, and the Provincial Judges would
be tried by the Federal Judges. They could be tried both
in Tort and in Criminal Court for
Breach of Trust and for
Treason.
Make Judicial Appointments for a FIXED TERM
of no more than five years (Jimmy Pattison where are you when we
need you?)
Judicial Re-Appointment must meet a Test for
Judicial Re-Appointment which demonstrates the prescribed
Impartiality (that is an Activism Free record.) and Non-Infamy
with the Electorate.
Automatic Temporary Suspension Without Pay
for a Judge who is going to Trial in Tort or in Criminal
Court, pending its outcome.
Eradication
of
Freemasonry from the Judiciary and Law Societies. Both
are granted special privileges by Parliamentary Statute which
they receive In Trust.. Judicial Candidates and sitting
Judges must be vetted for Occult
practices resulting in Public Safety concerns such as
Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is an established part of Occult worship
(See
Malachi Martin among others) and is reported to be a
tolerated practice of some high ranking Judges.
Trial by Jury of Judges before non-allied and
non-associated Judges, e.g.. Federal
Judges
tried before Provincial Judges, visa versa..
NO SPECIAL
PROSECUTORS for Judges or other Public Servants being
tried.
Under the "federal" division of powers in the BNA
(Constitution Act, 1867)) Education falls into the Provincial
domain. A parallel Provincial Statute to amend the licensing
and Suspension of Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
Four Missions
Removal of judges from office, Oklahoma
Constitution
(a) In addition to other
methods and causes prescribed by the Constitution and laws,
the judges of any court, exercising judicial power under the
provisions of Article VII, or under any other provision, of
the Constitution of Oklahoma, shall be subject to removal
from office, or to compulsory retirement from office, for
causes herein specified, by proceedings in the Court on the
Judiciary.
(b) Cause for removal from
office shall be: Gross neglect of duty; corruption in
office; habitual drunkenness; commission while in office of
any offense involving moral turpitude;
gross partiality in office;
oppression in office; or other grounds as may be
specified hereafter by the legislature.
(c) Cause for compulsory
retirement from office, with or without compensation, shall
be mental or physical disability preventing the proper
performance of official duty, or incompetence to perform the
duties of the office"
"The Family Courts
are <generally> a bunch of second rate hangers-on
... build each other's businesses through
referrals...Family Law is a <parasitic> self-sustaining
Industry"
Habeas
Corpus : "literally, "you
may have the body". A Habeas
Corpus is a legal writ that protects an individual against arbitrary
imprisonment by requiring that any person arrested be brought before
a court for formal charge. If the charge is considered to be valid,
the person must submit to trial; if not, the person goes free. When
the law is suspended, then individuals can be imprisoned
indefinitely and without charge."
.....
"This
is one of those moments when you want to grab liberals by the lapels
and demand, "Well, what did you expect?" ... A group called the
National Center for Men has filed a lawsuit they are calling "Roe v.
Wade for Men." ... More than three decades
ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but
nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual
intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the
freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced
procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an
unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up
control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women
are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as
the price of intimacy."
COMMENT: Roe
V. Wade was a "Femi-Narcissistic" decision, looking after the
interests of the Mother only. The principal established there
established was extrapolated into a Mother's "murder rights"
expressed in minimal sentences when murdering their children.
Equal Parenting eliminates much of this.
Father dealt difficult hand by the system
"Even last week, when the family court file of
Elaine and Leo Campione was released to the press -- in
significant measure because Mr. Campione didn't oppose the
media's bid to see it .. There is, to be frank, an
underlying perspective of feminist oppression from which all
else springs. .. Women are seen first as victims --
generally of male power and particularly of husband power -- and
presumed to be truth-tellers and good mothers until proven
otherwise. The starting point for men is that they are abusers
and deadbeat dads in the making unless they can prove the
contrary, and if it takes years for them to demonstrate that, oh
well."
Toronto:
As Member of Parliament for the riding of Toronto-Danforth,
Dennis Mills (Liberal Party) has consistently opposed equality
for gays and lesbians and his current campaign platform includes
his support for marriage discrimination. Residents of the riding
have organized a day to picket at Mills' campaign office. We
must not let Mills go through this election without being
confronted with his
record.
Support same-sex marriage. Bring signs (or we can provide some
for you in advance), noise makers, etc., to 607 Danforth Avenue
(west of Pape Avenue) at noon on Saturday June 19.
We are sorry to see Mr. Galloway was not re-elected after his
offices were targeted by
Homosexual Activists for repeated demonstrations in front of
the Constituency Offices during the Campaign. Many
pro-family MPs were attacked in that same fashion, and
subsequently lost re-election along with Mr. Galloway. To
see what the gays are doing, just Google
Roger Galloway, gay - Google Search
"Conservatives are committed to Shared Parenting. The
national party “Policy Declaration” that was passed by delegates
at our March 2005 Montreal convention
says
clearly that: Shared Parenting: is an objective of the
Conservative Party of Canada.
A Conservative
Government will make the necessary changes to the Divorce Act to
ensure that in the event of a marital breakdown, the Divorce Act
will allow both parents and all grandparents to maintain a
meaningful relationship with their children and grandchildren,
unless it is clearly demonstrated not to be in the best
interests of the children".
"Honourable
senators know that I have studied a terrible and pernicious
heart of darkness that has developed in our court system, being
the use of
FALSE ACCUSATIONS in civil justice.
This is the
mischief of litigating parties, usually mothers, suddenly within
the context of divorce and within child custody proceedings
falsely accusing the other party, usually fathers, of the sexual
abuse of their own children. ,,,
These
FALSE ALLEGATIONS are often made with the overt or
covert complicity of their lawyers. They are a lethal weapon in
the business of parental alienation. They are a tool for
achieving sole custody of children and creating fatherlessness."
“I’m pushing for
equality —both parents should have equal rights and equal access
to their child,”
Hill said. “The courts seem to
start from the premise that somehow fathers aren’t responsible
parents. But both parents are deemed good parents as long as the
marriage lasts; why are they not when the marriage ends?”
Jay has introduced
Bill C-245, An Act to amend the Divorce Act (shared
parenting) This bill would ensure that courts grant
custody of a child to both divorcing spouses unless there exists
evidence that it would not be in the best interests of the
child. The bill includes the recommendations of the Joint
House of Commons-Senate Subcommittee on Custody and Access which
the Liberals have essentially shelved.
Presently, the burden of proof is on the Accused to prove
themselves innocent (unless you are in a Criminal Court), Rare is the Judge who enforces Perjury laws against a
woman.
In
"Women and the Process of Constitutional Reform"
McLellan warns that
<Horrors!>
"Provincial
Legislatures may impose a presumption of Joint
Custody... and perpetuate the domination of men over
women"
“I’m pushing for
equality —both parents should have equal rights and equal access
to their child,”
Hill said. “The courts seem to
start from the premise that somehow fathers aren’t responsible
parents. But both parents are deemed good parents as long as the
marriage lasts; why are they not when the marriage ends?”
Jay has introduced
Bill C-245, An Act to amend the Divorce Act (shared
parenting) This bill would ensure that courts grant
custody of a child to both divorcing spouses unless there exists
evidence that it would not be in the best interests of the
child. The bill includes the recommendations of the Joint
House of Commons-Senate Subcommittee on Custody and Access which
the Liberals have essentially shelved.
Disclaimer: EqualParenting-BC.Ca encourages exercising democratic
rights such as the freedom of expression, but does not by association or
reference to other materials condone or sanction violence or hatred.
Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
